The prosecutor at Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s trial used his closing argument to impress on the jury that the victim, Amber Garrett, was grabbed from her bed in the middle of the night: “[W]e know from the evidence that Amber Garrett was in bed early the morning of November 24th, that someone… removed her without letting her get dressed… Amber’s body was found out in Bright, Indiana still wearing these panties and these clothes that she had worn in the bed on the evening of Saturday, November 23rd.… How about a person who would return to the Garrett household, pick up a half naked Amber Garrett and get her out into his car?” (emphasis added)[i]

As far back as 1996 the Ohio Supreme Court noted: “[T]he prosecutor’s final closing argument was riddled with improper comments regarding the nature and circumstances of the offense …” but it allowed Jeff’s conviction to stand.[ii] What no court knew, however, was that the prosecution had suppressed evidence that contradicted its version of events. Under duress, the prosecution finally supplied documents in 2016 showing that when Amber’s body was discovered she was not wearing the night clothes that she dressed in for bed on the Saturday night.[iii] She was, in fact, wearing a red dress that had been given to her[iv] (in 2014 Amber’s friend confirmed that this had been Amber’s dress for church).[v]

The prosecutor also made much of the fact that Amber’s glasses had been left behind; but the state withheld several documents that showed she could manage well without her glasses.

The suppression of these documents is highly significant. If the jurors had learnt that the victim had changed from her night clothes into a dress, and had not been helpless without her glasses, some might have concluded that she was not snatched from her bed in the night. And the outcome of the trial could have been different.

We sincerely hope that Jeff will soon be granted a new trial, where his jurors can see all of the evidence. Justice demands no less.